'83 302 Cam Advice
Thread Starter
|
Cargo Master
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 424
From: Too close to Houston
'83 302 Cam Advice
I'm trying to "wake up" a 302 in an '83 F-100 without ruining my fuel economy. I need a little more low-end torque since I'm now running 265/70R16 tires with a 3.50 axle ratio and AOD transmission.
I am looking at the Competition Cams Xtreme Energy XE250H with a 206/212 duration at .050" and a .289"/.296" lift and 110 degree lobe separation.
I'm also looking at a Crane Cam 260 H10 Hydraulic Energizer with 204/204 duration at .050" and .285"/.285" lift.
Has anyone tried these cams and liked them? Will either work with stock valve springs and push rods? (I know I'll need new lifters with a new cam.) I'm in the Houston area and the truck will have to pass emissions tests. Will the addition of a cam hurt me there? Any and all comments are welcome.
I am looking at the Competition Cams Xtreme Energy XE250H with a 206/212 duration at .050" and a .289"/.296" lift and 110 degree lobe separation.
I'm also looking at a Crane Cam 260 H10 Hydraulic Energizer with 204/204 duration at .050" and .285"/.285" lift.
Has anyone tried these cams and liked them? Will either work with stock valve springs and push rods? (I know I'll need new lifters with a new cam.) I'm in the Houston area and the truck will have to pass emissions tests. Will the addition of a cam hurt me there? Any and all comments are welcome.
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
The Energizer should be OK with stock springs. But if those springs have over a hundred thousand miles on em, you really need new ones.Your stock pushrods should be Ok as well, but give them a good visual inspection before reusing them. The ends mainly, they should have an even round profile. Change any that don't look right. New pushrods are cheap. The Extreme Energy cams don't work with stock springs or other components.
Last edited by baddad457; Sep 14, 2006 at 05:58 PM.
Thread Starter
|
Cargo Master
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,058
Likes: 424
From: Too close to Houston
Thanks!
Is this a better cam for what I want? I haven't put a cam in anything since I put a Sig Erson cam in a '81 Bronco 351M back in 1988 or so. I remember I could still get about 15mpg on the highway if I was careful and didn't have any trouble revving to sling mud out of my 31-10.50's. What should I expect performance-wise from cams like these?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Maddo...28452123QQrdZ1
Is this a better cam for what I want? I haven't put a cam in anything since I put a Sig Erson cam in a '81 Bronco 351M back in 1988 or so. I remember I could still get about 15mpg on the highway if I was careful and didn't have any trouble revving to sling mud out of my 31-10.50's. What should I expect performance-wise from cams like these?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Maddo...28452123QQrdZ1
Posting Guru
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,238
Likes: 0
From: Kiefer, Northeastern Okla
Agree with baddad- pushrods are cheap, I'd replace them. But, if you do decide to re-use them, be sure to put them back in the same holes they came out of. They wear to a specific rocker arm, just like flat tappet lifters to a cam. On the subject of cheap pushrods- if you go with the cam that requires a spring upgrade, don't scrimp on the pushrods. This may be one of the most overlooked part of the valvetrain. You want the stiffest rod you can afford. Either thicker walled, or tapered (fatter in the middle, which may require opening up the holes), to maintain optimum valvetrain geometry. With higher lifts and more open spring pressures, the pushrods can deflect (think polevault). When this happens, you're not going to realize the full benefit of your higher lift cam, and at higher rpm's contributes to valve float. Just my 2 cents.
Pete
Pete
Hotshot
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 11,141
Likes: 25
From: south louisiana
I've never put pushrods back in order and never had any problems from it. Lifters? Yea, pushrods, no. Only pushrods I've seen wear funny are the ones in a roller motor, and that's due to the fact they don't spin like flat tappet rods.
Post Fiend
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 8,600
Likes: 4
From: Iowa
I'm here on request from Sport45, in the FE forum...
Since you want to pass emissions, you might look at a cam intended for EFI. They have more lobe separation, and should give you better emissions.
Take a look at the Comp XE250H-14, part number 31-255-5. LSA is 114.
Another you might look at is the Crane 363901. It has a 112 lobe separation angle.
Your 260 H10 has a 110 degree LSA.
I'd go with the Comp XE250H-14 myself.
Since you want to pass emissions, you might look at a cam intended for EFI. They have more lobe separation, and should give you better emissions.
Take a look at the Comp XE250H-14, part number 31-255-5. LSA is 114.
Another you might look at is the Crane 363901. It has a 112 lobe separation angle.
Your 260 H10 has a 110 degree LSA.
I'd go with the Comp XE250H-14 myself.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
boingk
335 Series- 5.8/351M, 6.6/400, 351 Cleveland
3
Oct 2, 2016 07:48 AM
simons22
335 Series- 5.8/351M, 6.6/400, 351 Cleveland
15
Aug 22, 2015 08:19 PM
a63unibody
FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428)
4
Oct 30, 2010 02:56 PM
Andysutt
FE & FT Big Block V8 (332, 352, 360, 390, 406, 410, 427, 428)
19
Nov 18, 2003 07:02 AM
